[Taxacom] Ethiopian versus Afrotropical
fhaas at icipe.org
Thu Aug 14 08:56:43 CDT 2008
yes wikipedia knows more.. in any case it is their own name and the
Italians never really made it there...
John Grehan wrote:
> My understanding is that only the Eritrian part of Ethiopia was occupied - by the Italians for some decades.
> On the origin of the name, my recollection is similar to the following that I pulled off the web (so may be incorrect).
> The name of Ethiopia represents the Greek word for its native inhabitants. This was "aithiops" (= "burnt appearance"), from "aitho" (I burn) and "opsis" (aspect, appearance). The indigenous name, Abyssinia, may come from an Amharic root "hbs", meaning "mixed," but some Amharic scholars dispute this origin.
> John Grehan
>> to the best of my knowledge Ethiopia was never a colony and I would
>> suppose that they chose their name themselves, sometime in their 3000
>> year history.
>> 'Kenya' is also a genuinely Kenyan name. You might mix that up with
>> Rhodesia and Zimbabwe, German Southwest Africa and Namibia, French Sudan
>> for Mali etc. This does not apply to Ethiopia...
>> Fabian Haas wrote:
>>> Being in Africa, just south of Ethiopa, in Kenya, I do agree with
>>> Jacque, that the only reason for avoiding Ethiopian in this meaning is
>>> the possible confusing with the state of Ethiopia. No connotations and
>>> preferences apart from that.
>>> To my recollection all colleagues (no matter where they come from) here
>>> at icipe use Afrotropical and sub-Saharan instead of Ethiopian when
>>> refering to this large region. Ethiopian is only use when refering to
>>> the country.
>>> JOCQUE Rudy wrote:
>>>> "Afrotropical" is indeed synonym of "Ethiopian" in the large
>> biogeographical sense. The former was adopted in analogy with names as
>> Palaearctic, Nearctic, Neotropical. I never heard the idea that
>> "Ethiopian" was left because of bad connotations. It is simply because
>> Ethiopian could lead to confusion as it could mean "restricted to
>> Ethiopia" referring to the political entity, or "restricted to the
>> tropical area of Africa".
>>>> That is why we gave our journal the name "Journal of Afrotropical
>> Zoology" and not Journal of Ethiopian Zoology. I spoke with zoologists
>> from that country about the matter and they certainly were in favor of our
>>>> Herewith part of the editorial in the first issue.
>>>> The Journal of Afrotropical Zoology is obviously devoted to the biology
>> of animals living in the tropical part of Africa, including the islands
>> with that climatic regime but excluding the area north of the Sahara.
>> Although the divide between the Afrotropical and the Palaearctic realms is
>> not clear-cut, it is common knowledge that it lies somewhere near the
>> Tropic of Cancer (23°30'N), although some of the mountain areas south of
>> it may contain Palaearctic elements and vice versa for more northern
>> ranges. To the south, the entirety of Africa is included, although the
>> southern tip of the continent is known to have a temperate climate.
>> However, there is no clear zoological boundary between tropical and
>> southern temperate and it is generally accepted that the Afrotropical
>> realm includes all of South Africa.
>>>> Rudy JOCQUÉ
>>>> Head of Invertebrates non-insects section
>>>> Royal Museum for Central Africa
>>>> Department of African Zoology
>>>> Leuvensesteenweg 13
>>>> 3080 Tervuren, Belgium
>>>> Tel.: +32 2 769 54 10 Fax : +32 2 769 56 95
>>>> JOURNAL OF AFROTROPICAL ZOOLOGY
>>>> A peer reviewed journal on Africa's fauna
>>>> without page charges
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
>> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of John D. Oswald
>>>> Sent: mercredi 13 août 2008 17:36
>>>> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>> Subject: [Taxacom] Ethiopian versus Afrotropical
>>>> Can anyone provide commentary on the appropriateness, preference,
>>>> subtleties involved in using the term Ethiopian, versus Afrotropical,
>>>> referring to the biogeographic faunal region that generally encompasses
>>>> sub-Saharan Africa and parts of the southern/southeastern Arabian
>>>> peninsula? Is usage here largely determined by the historical usage
>>>> found in the literature of different taxa? Does this usage vary
>>>> appreciably based on where one works (e.g., do biologists in Africa
>>>> to use one term, while biologists in other areas of the world tend to
>>>> use the other)? Which is the 'better' term, and why? Are there
>>>> substantive reasons for using one term over the other? Are the terms
>>>> considered synonymous in general usage, or are there important
>>>> subtleties of meaning implicit in each? Is there a concise discussion
>>>> these issues in the literature somewhere (citations please...)?
>>>> John Oswald
>> FabianHaas2 at gmx.net, fhaas at icipe.org, Extension -2052
>> www.earwigs-online.de :: The Site on Earwig Biology
>> www.fabianhaas.de :: Personal Photo Website
>> Dr. Fabian Haas
>> ICIPE - African Insect Science for Food and Health
>> Duduville Campus, Kasarani
>> P.O. Box 30772 - 00100
>> N A I R O B I
>> Telephone No. +254 (0)20 8632000
>> Fax No. +254 (0)20 8632001 or 8632002
>> Cell Phone +254 (0)728 132868
>> Taxacom mailing list
>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Taxacom mailing list
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
FabianHaas2 at gmx.net, fhaas at icipe.org, Extension -2052
www.earwigs-online.de :: The Site on Earwig Biology
www.fabianhaas.de :: Personal Photo Website
Dr. Fabian Haas
ICIPE - African Insect Science for Food and Health
Duduville Campus, Kasarani
P.O. Box 30772 - 00100
N A I R O B I
Telephone No. +254 (0)20 8632000
Fax No. +254 (0)20 8632001 or 8632002
Cell Phone +254 (0)728 132868
More information about the Taxacom